Calculus for Babies (Baby University)

Great for toddlers to grasp basic concepts.

Even though this is for "babies" - my 11-month old Granddaughter enjoys most of the books in this authors series - but the calculus book falls short. Calculus concept for babies should have been delivered from a view point of area under a curve or the tangent to the slope. NOT SUMMARIZING "WE NEED CALCULUS". Very empty. I used a bold black pen and re-wrote the book .......

I admit at first I was a little skeptical given the title “calculus for babies” but being a math geek I wanted my new grandson to develop a love for math and science. I was not disappointed in the least. The entire book teaches how to solve for the surface area of a sphere in the simplest of terms, I’m so impressed I plan to purchase the rest of the books from Baby University.

Booked arrived damaged. It looks some kind of adhesive or glue fell into the book and discolored and stuck the pages together

The author has written another great addition to the Baby University series. I recommend it for all grandchildren of my age. In fact, it will also educate the baby's parents. I wonder how many parents even understand the concept of "an infinite number." Also, while I consider this to be a great baby introduction to integral calculus, I would like to see a different approach to differential calculus. We do need to teach math and science to all children instead of carefully teaching hate to children. Maybe then there will be some hope for the next generations.

When you think calculus you think derivatives and integrals, right? This covers the integrals, but I would’ve loved more on derivatives.

On the third page, after stating the aim of the book (which is to prove that a sphere has surface area equal to 4 times the surface area of its shadow), the author begins the argument as follows:"Wrap paper around the ball. The paper and the ball have the same surface area."Here the author is stating the fact that a cylinder of height 2r and radius r has surface area equal to a sphere or radius r. This is not at all an obvious fact, it is very surprising, and it requires a subtle argument.But the author makes no argument or even attempt at justifying the fact, he simply moves on to the next step, as if the claim is obvious or should be taken on authority.By presenting it as obvious, the reader is given an incredibly misguided impression of how mathematics is done. And one that unfortunately aligns with how mathematics is taught: as a set of formulas and equations to be accepted on authority and memorized by rote. This is exactly the sort of impression of mathematics I want to avoid instilling in my children.

The title is funny. The contents would be a difficult introduction to the concept of limits for an adult though. Why start with a 3D problem? How about good old "area under a curve" to begin with? Also wouldn't surface area of a sphere be easier to explain with progressively thinner flat strips of "area" vs the wrapping? Anyway, don't read to a baby, it will cry.